In Myers (2000), susceptibility and infection is defined for a given time period and as a constant throughout the network–so only varies on t. In order to include effects from previous/coming time periods, it adds up through the of the rioting, which in our case would be strength of tie, hence a dichotomous variable, whenever the event occurred a week within t, furthermore, he then introduces a discount factor in order to account for decay of the influence of the event. Finally, he obtains
V(t)=∑a∈A(t)S(a)mT(a),T≤t−T(a)t−T(a)
where A(t) is the set of all riots that occurred by time t, S(a) is the severity of the riot a, T(a) is the time period by when the riot a accurred and m is an indicator function.
In order to include this notion in our equations, I modify these by also adding whether a link existed between i and j at the corresponding time period. Furthermore, in a more general way, the time windown is now a function of the number of time periods to include, K, this way, instead of looking at time periods t and t+1 for infection, we look at the time range between t and t+K.
Following the paper’s notation, a more generalized formula for infectiousness is
(K∑k=1∑j≠ixji(t+k−1)zj(t+k)k)(K∑k=1∑j≠ixji(t+k−1)zj([t+k;T])k)−1
Where 1k would be the equivalent of 1t−T(a) in mayers. Alternatively, we can include a discount factor as follows
(K∑k=1∑j≠ixji(t+k−1)zj(t+k)(1+r)k−1)(K∑k=1∑j≠ixji(t+k−1)zj([t+k;T])(1+r)k−1)−1
Observe that when K=1, this formula turns out to be the same as the paper.
Likewise, a more generalized formula of susceptibility is
(K∑k=1∑j≠ixij(t−k+1)zj(t−k)k)(K∑k=1∑j≠ixij(t−k+1)zj([1;t−k])k)−1
Which can also may include an alternative discount factor
(K∑k=1∑j≠ixij(t−k+1)zj(t−k)(1+r)k−1)(K∑k=1∑j≠ixij(t−k+1)zj([1;t−k])(1+r)k−1)−1
Also equal to the original equation when K=1. Furthermore, the resulting statistic will lie between 0 and 1, been the later whenever i acquired the innovation lastly and right after j acquired it, been j its only alter.
(PENDING: Normalization of the stats)